From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B16A1F404 for ; Thu, 14 Dec 2017 21:07:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753298AbdLNVHe (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Dec 2017 16:07:34 -0500 Received: from elephants.elehost.com ([216.66.27.132]:24843 "EHLO elephants.elehost.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753236AbdLNVHV (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Dec 2017 16:07:21 -0500 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at elehost.com Received: from pangea ([70.25.22.42]) (authenticated bits=0) by elephants.elehost.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id vBEL7F4V050745 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 14 Dec 2017 16:07:16 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from rsbecker@nexbridge.com) From: "Randall S. Becker" To: "'Josef Wolf'" , References: <20171214130933.GA18542@raven.inka.de> In-Reply-To: <20171214130933.GA18542@raven.inka.de> Subject: RE: Need help migrating workflow from svn to git. Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2017 16:07:15 -0500 Message-ID: <005801d3751f$859f6c50$90de44f0$@nexbridge.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 16.0 Thread-Index: AQIA5x5KlHQcMIqb62PQwdaAr7U4AKLobwfQ Content-Language: en-ca Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org > On December 14, 2017 8:10 AM, Josef Wolf wrote: > Subject: Need help migrating workflow from svn to git. > > Hello folks, > > I am wondering whether/how my mode of work for a specific project > (currently based on SVN) could be transferred to git. > > I have a repository for maintaining configuration of hosts. This repository > contains several hundered scripts. Most of those scripts are don't depend on > each other. > > Every machine has a working copy of the repository in a specific directory. A > cron job (running every 15 minutes) executes "svn update" and executes the > scripts which are contained in this working copy. > > This way, I can commit changes to the main repository and all the hosts will > "download" and adopt by executing the newest revision of those scripts. > (The sripts need to be idempotent, but this is a different topic). > > NORMALLY, there are no local modifications in the working copy. Thus, > conflicts can not happen. Everything works fine. > > Sometimes, I need to fix a problem on some host or need to implement a > new feature. For this, I go to the working copy of a host where the change > needs to be done and start haking. With svn, I don't need to stop the cron > job. "svn update" will happily merge any in-coming changes and leave alone > the files which were not modified upstream. Conflicts with my local > modifications which I am currently hacking on are extremely rare, because > the scripts are pretty much independent. So I'm pretty much happy with this > mode of operation. > > With git, by contrast, this won't work. Git will refuse to pull anything as long > as there are ANY local modifications. The cron job would need to > > git stash > git pull > git stash pop > > But this will temporarily remove my local modifications. If I happen to do a > test run at this time, the test run would NOT contain the local modifications > which I was about to test. Even worse: if I happen to save one of the > modified files while the modifications are in the stash, the "git stash pop" will > definitely cause a conflict, although nothing really changed. > > So, how would I get this workflow with git? Is it possible to emulate the > behavior of "svn update"? > > Any ideas? You might want to consider a slight modification to your approach as follows. Instead of using git pull, use git fetch. Have each system on its own branch (sys1 = my-sys1-branch, for example) so you can track who has what. In your scripts, consider: git fetch if nothing changed, done git status if no changes, git merge --ff master && git push origin my-sys1-branch && done if changes, send an email whining about the changes your script could then (depending on your environment) git commit -a && git merge && git push origin my-sys1-branch && done This would allow you to track the condition of each system at your single upstream repository. Just my $0.02 Cheers. Randall\ -- Brief whoami: NonStop&UNIX developer since approximately UNIX(421664400)/NonStop(211288444200000000) -- In my real life, I talk too much.